[Suggestion] A small buff for the T5-AMC Carbine?

It just seems to have a really low DPS. From my understanding it's the same as the TRAC-5's damage with a substantially lower RoF.

I like the gun a lot, and if you go for headshots it's not so bad, but for a long-range carbine I'd expect enough damage per second to drop a target before he/she gets to cover at long-range.

PS: When I say small buff I mean really small, like a 5 point damage increase.

5 points of damage wouldn't accomplish anything but make it more effective for maybe 5 more meters.. They should reduce the first shot and horizontal recoil, and increase the vertical recoil. Basically making it a weak carbine version of a TMG-50.

In the beta we had a carbine like the other factions which did slightly more damage per round. However it was deemed to good and recieved a nerf, effectively giving the TR Carbines very similar stats and very minor differences. Excluding the Jaguar and the Lynx which got added at a later date the other carbines are almost replicas of each other.

Think my main problem with TR weapons as a whole is the lack of variation. It drives me nuts seeing the same model over and over with very minor differences. a lot of the models look identical to the user.

It needs a damage buff.

Its in the same "class" as the VS Pulsar C (167dmg, low RoF), and the NC ACX11 (200dmg, low RoF). Sadly, with the T5-AMC only having 143 damage, and low RoF, makes it not very appealing.

DPRound
AC-X11: 200
Pulsar C: 167
T5-AMC: 143 (148 with 5 damage increase)

RPM/S
AC-X11: 500 / 8.33~
Pulsar C: 577 / 9.6166~
T5-AMC: 652 / 10.866~

DPSecond
AC-X11: 1666.66~
Pulsar C: 1605.9833~
T5-AMC: 1553.933~ (1608.266~ with a 5 damage increase)

DPMagazine
AC-X11: 4000
Pulsar C: 5010
T5-AMC: 5720 (5920 with a 5 damage increase)

There is roughly a 50 DPS difference between each level of DPS of the rifles, and only 100 some odd difference in DPS between the extreme ends. Meanwhile the damage per magazine has more then 1000 damage difference between AC-X11 and Pulsar C and the T5-AMC steps over the Pulsar C by 720 damage.

The problem? The DPS is relatively fine. The DPM however COULD use a reduction in order to get us to a more respectable level of DPS (The DPM is the reason why our carbine has the lowest DPS so to speak). Our LR carbine is essentially built for more close-mid range engagements where ducking for cover and reload isn't an option. All things considered, there is no significant imbalance with the weapon. Sure it makes TR weapons bland and tasteless, but TR have always been pretty bland and tasteless. We've never been about flash, tech, or efficiency. We spray the range with bullets, that's what we do. An archaic concept that would have any army losing in weeks, but whatever this is a game.

Even better, Compare the fastest VS, NC and TR carbines and VS/NC share the fastest fire rate then the TR carbine comes in behind them.. whats even more screwed is the faster NC/VS carbines share almost identical stats to the Slower TR carbine as if they though the TR one was to good and reduced its ROF.

Flip it round and the Fastest firing LMG goes to the TR, Compare it to the fastest NC/VS LMG and the TR has increased Bloom, Spread and recoil to count for the faster fire rate.

DPRound
GD-7F: 143
VX6-7: 143
Serpent: 143
LC2 Lynx: 143
LC3 Jaguar: 143

RPM/S
GD-7F: 845 / 14.0833~
VX6-7: 800 / 13.33~
Serpent: 845 / 14.0833~
LC2 Lynx: 800 / 13.33~
LC3 Jaguar: 750 / 12.5


DPSecond
GD-7F: 2013.9166~
VX6-7: 1906.66~
Serpent: 2013.9166~
LC2 Lynx: 1906.66~
LC3 Jaguar: 1787.5


DPMagazine
GD-7F: 4290
VX6-7: 4290
Serpent: 4290
LC2 Lynx: 5720
LC3 Jaguar: 5720

Once again TR have insane DPM compared to the other empires simply because of those 10 extra bullets.

And if you look at TR RoF compared to the other empires for all weapons, you would see that our slowest RoF is the T5-AMC at 652, which is faster then almost all other carbines, competing or otherwise. The NC has 1 carbine with a faster RoF then the SLOWEST TR carbine, and that is the GD-7F. The VS have 4 that are faster then the TR's slowest, and one that is as fast. When you consider the fact that the T5-AMC is like the idiot step child of TR carbines (being the slowest), then look at the other RoFs that we have, 698 for the Trac-5 S compared to the VS, they have 2 as fast and 2 faster. Our next highest is 750 which is half our total carbines and the VS have only 2 that beat that.

Then you look at TR's actual strength, our damage per magazine. All of our carbines have a DPM of 5720 because they all do 143 damage per round and hold 40 rounds.

The next highest DPM is 5010 for those carbines that do 167 damage with 30 rounds, then comes the NC's AX-11 with 200 damage and 20 rounds for an amazing 4000 damage per magazine. And what the heck, just for giggles, lets see if 143 x 30 = 4290 > 143 x 40 = 5720... Nope...

TR deal damage per magazine. We favor volume, not efficiency.

Not sure why DPM should even be an issue.

Make the T5:
167damage
30 round clip
150 ammo

-or-

167damage
40 round clip
100 ammo

-or-

etc. etc. etc.....

Its in line with the others, and would give TR some kind of options for playstyle. Right now playing a carbine class for VS/NC always feels more "open" on what you can do, because you have options that cover the High ROF CQC, Decent ROF with decent damage, and High damage/Low ROF. TR is missing this. Why?

The T5 does seem to be rather mediocre at its intended use. I feel a 5 or 10 bullet/clip drop would be fine in exchange for a harder hitting gun that is a bit more NC-like.

After I used the T5 AMC long enough to get a Gold medal for it, I came to the conclusion that it's basically in "carbine limbo."

I have no idea what this gun is supposed to do. Looking at the stats, it fills the same niche as the Razor GD-23 [NC], where it's more like the standard carbine modified to be a little easier to handle at long range. However, the attachments that can be mounted on it are identical to those on the AC-X11 [NC] and Pulsar C [VS], which are the carbines with higher damage but slower rate of fire that are designed to be kind of "marksman" weapons.

Basing my assumption on the attachment options, it's supposed to be long-range with higher damage and accuracy, but it just doesn't have the stats that come with that role.

It's certainly better than the TRAC-5 if you're focusing on long range, but a true long range carbine is just missing from the TR's selection.

I compared them in a thread a while back with the info from google docs. The COF,Bloom, Recoil and such are almost identical when Comparing the fastest NC/VS Carbine to the Fastest TR carbine.

We may get 10 more rounds but the carbines i compared all did the same damage per bullet. the only difference was a reduced fire rate and increased clip capacity on the TR carbine. This does not compensate for the fact ina straight up fire fight you will lose to the NC/VS carbines every time if all of them can aim at mid range.

The faster fire rates are not offset with increased stats. Where the TR's fastest LMG has drastically increased stats when compared to the fastest NC/VS Lmg and they all do the same damage per round, Only different is the TR are penalized for higher rate of fire with increase Recoil, Bloom and COF.

Yet it appears the NC/VS are not. If you want the numbers look for my previous thread on this.

Honestly, i'm happy with the route they took with the AMC.
Both its counterparts (AC-X11 and Pulsar C) have a slower rate of fire in exchange for pure stopping power. Obviously, better stopping power equals better performance at range.
With the T5 AMC they instead gave up rate of fire to gain a very controllabe recoil and high bullet speed (the best by far), which allows to put rounds into targets at mid range much more easily than with a TRAC-5 or another carbine.

I use it with advanced foregrip, compensator and i'm still deciding whether to keep HVA or not. No optics, because i hate all of them except for the IR/NV which is meh on the AMC.


It's a T16, basically. Slow and very accurate fire, you can easily put a 10-round burst into an enemy's chest at 50 meters with very little recoil.
With the other weapons the recoil is 50% higher (0.3 for the AMC, 0.42 for the Pulsar C and 0.45 for the AC-X11) and it's balanced horizontally, which means you can't compensate for it easily during long bursts unlike the AMC, and their cone of fire widens faster (0.05 per-shot for the AMC, 0.06 for the Pulsar C and 0.07 for the AC-X11).
The first shot recoil multiplier is instead way higher on the AMC, but it's not that important with longer bursts.

In the end, the AMC is good as it is because while its dps are very low, its capability of delivering those dps much more consistently than its counterparts balances everything out at mid-range. Also, easier control = more headshots, never forget that. :3

other people seem to be able to kill me with it jsut fine.
if you want more damage. feel free to join the NC ^^

sigh, people still talking about DPS regarding the balancing of a weapon supposed to be middle/long range.

For some reason it's fine giving NC the highest RoF (tied with VS) and low damage carbine or even dare reducing the clip size to make a max 200 damage carbine. For some reason it's fine giving VS the highest RoF (tied with NC) carbine and an other with a higher damage tier.

But no way we can make a higher tier damage for TR at the cost of a reduced clip size and slower RoF, instead we should give them a weapon with the same damage as the other carbines and make it with sustained fire in mind, because obviously sustained fire is what counts at longer range and they wouldn't dare ask for some real diversity.

Asymmetric game design is fine in itself but give every class at least one decent weapon for each role (like you already did in several cases) and then specialize the rest especially if you're going to put ideology or lore behind the factions. If i only cared about weaponry i would have rolled NC but the lore made me pick TR, i doubt being the only one in this kind of situation and i'm not even talking about people who joined their friends/mates faction. All this to end up with weapons they really hate and don't fit their gameplay at all without a true alternative.

one thing that hasn't been brought up that i feel is worth mentioning in favor of the AMC, it has the highest projectile velocity of all carbines on all factions, and can get HV ammo on top of that.

Believe what you want dude. Argue how you wish. Be a negative self loathing person for all I care.

Your facts are flawed, strait up. That is all I have to say on this matter. You point out "flaws" or areas in which our weapons are inferior and completely ignore the areas in which they are superior. You want an unbalanced game.

the GD7F has 30 bullets unlike its TR counterpart AND it takes way longer to reload. thats hardly on par with the Lynx.

you also forgot the increased ADS movement speed of the lynx/jaguar 0.75 instead of 0.5 for your weapon, but still, it's a possibility you have if it fits your gameplay or situation better over a more NC-ish weapon. TR have Jag/Lynx having the same role but with a different handling due to the recoil pattern and the Trac-S which is a grenade launcher mounted on a carbine, everything else is a downgrade of the Jag/Lynx : you sacrifice a lot of RoF and close quarter efficiency without gaining what is needed for a medium/long range weapon, better use a shotgun with slugs even if it feels like having a gravitational anomaly following you.

The GD7F has a higher rate of fire than the Lynx. That means if a guy with the GD7F and a guy with the Lynx stood still and started shooting eachother at the sametime, the GD7F would win. You're right it isn't on par with the Lynx, it's better than the Lynx. Have my 10 extra bullets and give me 50 more RPM.

EDIT: Oh, and I just checked the reload times of both carbines out of curiosity, and the GD7F has a .1 shorter reload time than the Lynx.... Research before you post next time.

Don't forget that T5 AMC has the shortest reload time of all TR carbines. Not that it plays a big role with our huge, throbbing... clip size.

At first I was in love with T5 AMC, I very much like the idea of a precise long range weapon. But infatuation was quickly replaced by dissapointment when I realised that forward grip does liitle to nothing, same for compensator, 6x scope is only a nuisance and it's impossible to actually snipe anything because of humongous TTK at long range.